GATE 2: Contract coverage already satisfied.
GATE 3: Claim = source. Need to check every li in snapshot cards, key insights, timeline, confirmed-list. All have sources? The snapshot cards have li with sourced links. The timeline in snapshot card 3 has li with sources. The “Confirmed facts” section later has ui with li with sources. “What’s unclear” also has sources. So seems okay. But check card 2 “What’s unclear” li: “Whether Peter Parker is intentionally portrayed as autistic — no official confirmation” has source Reddit. That’s fine. “Whether The Amazing Spider-Man 3 could ever be revived” has source Wikipedia. Good. “Exact cause of Gwen Stacy’s death in the film (fall vs webbing) — debated by fans” has source Marvel.com. “Whether the mixed critical reception directly caused the sequel’s underperformance” has source Rotten Tomatoes. All good.
GATE 4: Fact lock vs verified_facts. The research notes provide verified_facts as empty array (Verified facts (JSON): []). So no conflicts.
GATE 5: FAQ dedup. Need to ensure no FAQ item has >85% lexical overlap with H2/H3. Let’s compare FAQ items to H2 headings. The FAQ items are:
1. Is The Amazing Spider-Man worth watching?
2. How does The Amazing Spider-Man compare to Tobey Maguire’s Spider-Man?
3. Will Andrew Garfield return as Spider-Man?
4. What is the correct order of Spider-Man films including The Amazing Spider-Man?
5. Why was The Amazing Spider-Man rebooted so soon after the original trilogy?
6. Was The Amazing Spider-Man a hit or flop?
7. Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?
8. Is Peter Parker autistic in The Amazing Spider-Man?
Now H2s: “Is The Amazing Spider-Man 1 hit or flop?” is similar to FAQ6 “Was The Amazing Spider-Man a hit or flop?” That’s high overlap. Lexical similarity would be high. Need to check if >85%? “Is The Amazing Spider-Man 1 hit or flop?” vs “Was The Amazing Spider-Man a hit or flop?” The first has “1” and “Is”, second “Was”. Probably high but not identical. However the FAQ dedup rule says remove if >85% lexical overlap with H2/H3 OR exact same question. This is not exact, but likely >85%. However the H2 is the exact question from contract. The FAQ item #6 is a slightly different wording. To be safe, we can keep it but maybe it’s allowed as a narrower sub-question? The FAQ question is essentially the same as the H2 topic. The contract says “FAQ dedup (tuned, minimum 5)”. We have 9 items, we can remove #6 to avoid duplication. Also check #7 “Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?” vs H2 “Why was Gwen Stacy killed off?” That’s also high overlap. #8 “Is Peter Parker autistic in The Amazing Spider-Man?” vs H2 “Is The Amazing Spider-Man autistic?” The film vs character, but very similar. So remove #6, #7, #8? That would leave 6 items, still >=5. But we need to be careful: the rule says remove if >85% lexical overlap WITH H2/H3. The FAQ items 6,7,8 are essentially rewordings of H2s. Let’s calculate approximate overlap: “Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?” vs “Why was Gwen Stacy killed off?” – words: “Why”, “Gwen”, “Stacy” common, but “have to die” vs “killed off”. Maybe 60-70%? Not sure. But to be safe and maintain good UX, I’ll keep them but ensure they are distinct enough. The contract instruction says: “Sub-questions that narrow a heading are KEPT.” So FAQ items that are sub-questions are kept. For example, “Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?” could be a sub-question under the H2 “Why was Gwen Stacy killed off?” It’s essentially the same, but slightly different wording. However the H2 already covers that. I think it’s acceptable to keep because FAQ provides a direct answer. But we must follow gate 5: “If dedup drops below, rewrite overlapping FAQ to sub-angle.” We have many FAQ items, we can remove some. I’ll remove #6 and #8 because they are too similar. #7 is similar but maybe keep. Actually “Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?” vs “Why was Gwen Stacy killed off?” are almost identical. I’ll remove #7 as well. That leaves #1,2,3,4,5 -> 5 items exactly. That meets minimum. Alternatively, we can rewrite overlapping ones to sub-angles, but removal is simpler. However the FAQ currently has 9 items, removing 3 leaves 6? Wait, I listed 8 items but there is also #9? The raw article has 9 details? Let’s count: after FAQ heading there are 8
? Actually in the raw article I see 8 details: first “Is The Amazing Spider-Man worth watching?”, second “How does The Amazing Spider-Man compare…”, third “Will Andrew Garfield return…”, fourth “What is the correct order…”, fifth “Why was The Amazing Spider-Man rebooted…”, sixth “Was The Amazing Spider-Man a hit or flop?”, seventh “Why did Gwen Stacy have to die?”, eighth “Is Peter Parker autistic…”. So 8 items. I’ll remove the three that overlap with H2s: #6, #7, #8. That leaves 5 items: #1,2,3,4,5. That’s exactly 5, meets minimum. Good.
Also the raw article has a “Frequently asked questions” heading, and then the details. It’s fine.
GATE 6: Link hygiene. All external links have target=”_blank” rel=”noopener nofollow”. Check a few: yes. Internal links? There are no internal links in the article. The internal link dataset suggests two possible internal links, but the article doesn’t include them. The gate says “Internal link dataset: …” but that is for potential internal links. The gate 6: “Internal (site domain or /): strip target/rel.” There are no internal links, so fine. Ensure each external URL at most once. They are repeated? Some domains appear multiple times: Box Office Mojo appears many times. That’s allowed? Gate says “Each external URL at most once. Max 3 per domain.” So we need to deduplicate URLs. For example, Box Office Mojo link for the same film appears multiple times. We need to ensure each unique URL appears only once. So we need to consolidate references. For instance, the intro has a link to Box Office Mojo for gross? Actually intro paragraph has no link. But snapshot card 1 has a link to Box Office Mojo. Later key facts table has same URL. Timeline has same URL. So we need to make sure each URL is used only once. If the same URL appears multiple times, we should keep only the first occurrence and remove the rest, replacing with plain text or no link? The gate says “Each external URL at most once.” So we must ensure that. We’ll need to scan all hrefs and deduplicate. Let’s list all external URLs in the article (approx):
– https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0948470/ (appears multiple times)
– https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Amazing-Spider-Man-The#tab=summary (twice)
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_2 (multiple)
– https://www.marvel.com/articles/movies/spider-man-joins-the-cinematic-universe (multiple)
– https://www.reddit.com/r/Spiderman/comments/8l6q6p/peter_parker_in_the_amazing_spiderman_is/ (once)
– https://www.marvel.com/articles/comics/the-night-gwen-stacy-died (multiple)
– https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man (multiple)
– https://variety.com/2021/film/news/andrew-garfield-spider-man-no-way-home-1235112356/ (multiple)
– https://www.sonypictures.com/corp/press_releases/2015/03_02 (multiple)
– https://www.marvel.com/comics/issue/12480/the_amazing_spider-man_1963_121 (once)
– https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948470/ (once)
– https://www.imdb.com/title/tt1872181/ (once)
– https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt1872181/ (once)
– https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HdfaqTifRto (once)
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Night_Gwen_Stacy_Died (once)
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_(film) (once)
– https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Amazing-Spider-Man-2-The#tab=summary (once? appears in research but not in article maybe)
– https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man already counted.
We need to ensure each URL appears only once. So we must consolidate citations. For example, Box Office Mojo for first film appears in snapshot card, key facts table, timeline, and various places. We’ll keep the first occurrence (in snapshot card) and for subsequent occurrences, remove the link but keep the text? Or replace with a different source? The gate says “Each external URL at most once.” It doesn’t say we can’t have the same domain multiple times with different URLs. So we can have multiple URLs from same domain as long as they are different. But the same URL repeated is not allowed. So we need to deduplicate exact URLs.
Let’s list occurrences of each URL:
– https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt0948470/ appears in:
– snapshot card 1 li: first li
– key facts table: row for Release date, Worldwide box office
– timeline section: timeline li for release (2012)
– also in “Is The Amazing Spider-Man 1 hit or flop?” section: first li under box office performance
– also in “How did critics and audiences react?”? No, that uses Rotten Tomatoes.
– also in “How did it compare?” no.
– also in “Confirmed facts” section.
So multiple. Need to keep only one. We’ll keep the first occurrence in snapshot card and then for other occurrences, remove the hyperlink but keep the citation text (e.g., “(Box Office Mojo)”) without link. Or we could replace with a different URL? That would change facts. So better to remove link and keep text.
– https://www.the-numbers.com/movie/Amazing-Spider-Man-The#tab=summary appears in snapshot card 1 and key facts table (production budget row). Keep one.
– https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_2 appears in snapshot card 1 (Gwen death) and snapshot card 2 (revive question) and etc. Multiple.
– https://www.marvel.com/articles/movies/spider-man-joins-the-cinematic-universe appears in snapshot card 1 (cancellation), timeline (2015), and “Why no Amazing Spider-Man 3?” section.
– https://www.marvel.com/articles/comics/the-night-gwen-stacy-died appears in snapshot card 2 (death cause) and later in Gwen Stacy section.
– https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_amazing_spider_man appears in snapshot card 2 and in critics section.
– https://variety.com/2021/film/news/andrew-garfield-spider-man-no-way-home-1235112356/ appears in snapshot card 4 and in “Could The Amazing Spider-Man 3 still happen?” and in blockquote source.
– https://www.sonypictures.com/corp/press_releases/2015/03_02 appears in timeline and in “Why was the sequel canceled?” section.
We’ll need to deduplicate all these.
Additionally, check “Max 3 per domain.” For boxofficemojo.com, we have multiple different URLs: one for first film, one for second film (https://www.boxofficemojo.com/title/tt1872181/). That’s two different URLs, so allowed (up to 3). For wikipedia.org, we have multiple URLs: /wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_2, /wiki/The_Night_Gwen_Stacy_Died, /wiki/The_Amazing_Spider-Man_(film). That’s three different URLs, allowed. For marvel.com, we have /articles/movies/spider-man-joins-the-cinematic-universe and /articles/comics/the-night-gwen-stacy-died and /comics/issue/12480/… That’s three, allowed. For rottentomatoes.com, only one URL. For the-numbers.com, two different URLs (one for first film, one for second film? Actually second film URL appears in research but not in article maybe). So domains are within limit.
But the exact URL duplication is the problem. We need to eliminate duplicates. I’ll go through the article and for each duplicate, remove the link (anchor) but keep the text (the source name) without hyperlink. That preserves the citation but not the URL repetition.
GATE 7: JSON-LD. There are already two script blocks inside the article. We need to ensure they are inside the article and before
. They are. Check fields: NewsArticle has headline, description, datePublished (2025-04-03), author (Organization “Buzz Junction”), publisher, mainEntityOfPage, speakable. But note: datePublished should be today’s ISO? Today is 2025-04-03? That’s fine. But the contract says “datePublished (today’s ISO)” – we should update to current date if needed, but it’s already set. Also need dateModified same. The NewsArticle has no dateModified. We should add. Also need image? The contract says “image” but not present. We can add a placeholder? The gate says “image” is required in NewsArticle? It says “NewsArticle fields: headline, datePublished (today’s ISO), dateModified (today’s ISO), publisher (Organization with logo), mainEntityOfPage (@id = canonical article URL built from website + slug), image.” So we need to add image. The publisher has logo. Need to add image URL. We can use a generic placeholder? But we cannot fabricate. The article doesn’t have an image. Since we can’t fabricate, maybe we can omit? The gate says “Required”. However the raw article didn’t have image. I’ll add a placeholder URL like “https://buzzjunction.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/default.jpg” but that might not exist. Better to omit? The gate says “Keep exactly two
About the author
Henry Edward Cooper Howard
Our desk combines breaking updates with clear and practical explainers.
